How sharp can you get your S30V?

[Ankerson]

I see. Must be enough to matter to you. Thanks.

Yeah it was noticable lets just say.

I don't want to go into it to deep because it would be a very negative post because of the hype it got and I have quite a bit of experience with S30V.

As a side note I am getting a Para 2. :)

[nozh2002]

In my own testing S35VN did better than S30V and and it's noteworthy that a certain high end company will be switching from S30V to S35VN in the near future from what I heard.

In my test it show much worse results (ZT-302, Buck 110 and Mule CPM S35VN:

cut S30 S30 S35
000 015 020 010
001 025 030 020
010 050 040 035
050 065 050 040
100 070 060 065
200 075 065 080

It is almost same as CPM S30V from KAI ZT, but clearly worse then Buck CPM S30V.

So no reason to switch on my opinion, while there is cleary much better CTS-XHP.

Thanks, Vassili.

[nozh2002]

Yeah it was noticable lets just say.

I don't want to go into it to deep because it would be a very negative post because of the hype it got and I have quite a bit of experience with S30V.

As a side note I am getting a Para 2. :)

It will be nice to see details.

Thanks, Vassili.

[ChrisR]

Obviously HT is impossible to see and most manufacturers will not give out details but I guess it is similar within the same knife manufacturer's product range ... but it would be very interesting to see how edge-angle affects the testing and also how similar the initial sharpness of each knife is judged before the test is made :)

[unit]

In my test it show much worse results (ZT-302, Buck 110 and Mule CPM S35VN:

cut S30 S30 S35
000 015 020 010
001 025 030 020
010 050 040 035
050 065 050 040
100 070 060 065
200 075 065 080

It is almost same as CPM S30V from KAI ZT, but clearly worse then Buck CPM S30V.

So no reason to switch on my opinion, while there is cleary much better CTS-XHP.

Thanks, Vassili.

I hesitate to even ask this...

What (if any) testing have you done to verify that HT processes or results (hardness) are in any way standardized between your samples?

I have had testing shared with me that shows STRIKING differences in S30V owing a point or two in hardness alone.

[nozh2002]

I hesitate to even ask this...

What (if any) testing have you done to verify that HT processes or results (hardness) are in any way standardized between your samples?

I have had testing shared with me that shows STRIKING differences in S30V owing a point or two in hardness alone.

I tests real knives and do not care too much about what would be ideal for given steel - if manufacturers does not use it for production version for whatever reason, there is no point to count on it. I take production version and test it. I guess same approach Ankerson take as well.

Thanks, Vassili.

[Evil D]

My S30V Native, i don't think i've ever had it even as sharp as my VG10 knives. I'm sure it might hold the edge longer but it never did take the edge as well, and certainly nowhere near as sharp as my ZDP Caly 3.

[nozh2002]

Obviously HT is impossible to see and most manufacturers will not give out details but I guess it is similar within the same knife manufacturer's product range ... but it would be very interesting to see how edge-angle affects the testing and also how similar the initial sharpness of each knife is judged before the test is made :)

All knives whittle hair and you may see as well initial sharpness tested - 000 cuts.

Thanks, Vassili.

[unit]

I tests real knives and do not care too much about what would be ideal for given steel - if manufacturers does not use it for production version for whatever reason, there is no point to count on it. I take production version and test it. I guess same approach Ankerson take as well.

Thanks, Vassili.

That is fine, but understand that your statements are misleading as they imply that there is a direct comparison between the steels and that simply is can not be backed up with the data you have shared in this thread. Your statement, "....stay away from CPM S35V wich perform worse then CPM S30V" implies that S35V is worse than S30V, but the fact may very well be that you simply ignored a HUGE variable in your testing and ranking.

You can test real world knives all you like, but assigning conclusions regarding steel to those tests and declaring a list of ranking without making any effort to understand the critical variables is questionable.

This statement,

I guess same approach Ankerson take as well.

Sort of gets at what I am saying. If the same approach leads to OPPOSITE conclusions, how valid is the approach?

Trusting that every knife manufacturer/maker is optimizing their heat treat/hardness toward the same performance objectives is perhaps not a safe assumption.

Steel is the Heart of the blade, heat treat is the Spirit.

Not my words, but I think they are fitting here.

[nozh2002]

That is fine, but understand that your statements are misleading as they imply that there is a direct comparison between the steels and that simply is can not be backed up with the data you have shared in this thread. Your statement, "....stay away from CPM S35V wich perform worse then CPM S30V" implies that S35V is worse than S30V, but the fact may very well be that you simply ignored a HUGE variable in your testing and ranking.

Well, I only heart about Ankerson's tests but did not know details so far.

But based on my tests, which is only available for review now CPM S35V performs worse then CPM S30V. You are wellcome to provide test results that will be different, but not just say that I - "simply ignored a HUGE variable in your testing and ranking". This is just words without any proves behind and so anybody can say this - I see no value here.

So let me state it for you - CPM S35V so far in real tests performs worse, but there is some unproved baseless believes that this may not be true.

For last years Crusible attempts to produce some good steel, comparable to ZDP-189 were not quite successful - I do not expect any good from them further.

You can test real world knives all you like, but assigning conclusions regarding steel to those tests and declaring a list of ranking without making any effort to understand the critical variables is questionable.

So far it is just you just call it critical, it is not enough for me to say that CPM S35V is in any way better then CPM S30V - tests shows that it is worse.

Talking about my effort - I cut 200 times manila rope 45 times (9000 total) testing 41 different knives over several years.

What did you done? Except you sad me that this is not enough effort for you.

Paying with words is pointless for me. Do some testing, pay some effort, prove your point - I am not interested in speech exercise.

Thanks, Vassili.

[SMI]

Here we go again... please not again.

[unit]

Couple of things:

If I claim that I cut strings with 2 knives both with S30V and one was Brand X with a wood handle and one was a Brand Y with a G-10 handle and one out performed the other, could I then proclaim that the handle material is to credit? Then could I force the world to provide data to prove me wrong? Would it be wrong to expect them not to laugh at me?

If I cut a BILLION strings would that make my claims more valid? Would they be more valid than those by the person who cuts only a million?

Think about it. If you can not comprehend that hardness/heat treat could have an impact on edge retention.....I am wasting my time....

[unit]

Here we go again... please not again.

I hear you...I am done...Sorry I ever "went there".

Apologies to all.

[SMI]

I hear you...I am done...Sorry I ever "went there".

Apologies to all.

Ha, I just didn't want this to erupt like the last one. No need to be sorry, it was more of a "I hope this doesn't happen again." Hah.

[Nederspyder]

:eek: Manila alert!

[pleeho]

The basic question posed by Ken & Vassili is simply this:
Was that S35V sample heat-treated in a similar way as that S30V sample? If it was, then Vassili's results have validity. If they were heat-treated differently, then we have two variables either of which could have influenced Vasilli's results.

[nozh2002]

Couple of things:

If I claim that I cut strings with 2 knives both with S30V and one was Brand X with a wood handle and one was a Brand Y with a G-10 handle and one out performed the other, could I then proclaim that the handle material is to credit? Then could I force the world to provide data to prove me wrong? Would it be wrong to expect them not to laugh at me?

If I cut a BILLION strings would that make my claims more valid? Would they be more valid than those by the person who cuts only a million?

Think about it. If you can not comprehend that hardness/heat treat could have an impact on edge retention.....I am wasting my time....

Again, do some cutting. I do not care about teenager like argueing. I did some tests - you produce a lot of typing. Do some tests first - then talk. Otherwise you are wasting not only your time...

All those "logic" you can keep for yourself - I saw lot more before. Show me what is behind you words. So far I do not see anything.

Think about this.

Thanks, Vassili.

[nozh2002]

The basic question posed by Ken & Vassili is simply this:
Was that S35V sample heat-treated in a similar way as that S30V sample? If it was, then Vassili's results have validity. If they were heat-treated differently, then we have two variables either of which could have influenced Vasilli's results.

All blades was heat treated by well known manufacturers, all blades are from production knives. Results are here.

Of course they have most likely different heat treatment procedure - as any different steels. So we are talking about quality of HT and I do not have any doubt in Buck (Paul Boss) and Spyderco ability to provide high quality heat treatment - best in production environment.

In theory I can imagine that someone may do better heat treatment then Paul Boss did for that Buck 110 CPM S30V or Spyderco for Mule CPM S35V. However, I may say that they were heat treated in best production environment which I think we may expect from production knives.

And even if someone may do better with special attention or careful process, it looks like in production we will have what we already have.

There is possibility that Spyderco did not done good job with heat treatment for this particular Mule with CPM S35V. But so far there is no indication that this is what happened.

Ankerson mentioned that he had different results - let see his results. But from what exist right now, without any speculations and baseless assumption test results I have indicates that CPM S35VN does not do any better then CPM S30V.

Regards, Vassili.

[Handwrecker]

No one is trying to say your tests are in vain, I enjoy reading your posts and seeing the results of the cutting tests. But with any scientific experiment, you have to have a control, and results must be able to be replicated. Different heat treats, different steels, different manufacturers, different blade geometries; what's the control?

Case in point: I have a Buck Nighthawk and used to have a Benchmade Rift. Buck was 420HC and BM was 154CM. On cutting down old, ratty electric wires, the Rift chipped and dulled faster than the Nighthawk. Does that mean that 420HC is a better steel than 154CM? Or was the Nighthawk simply thicker behind the edge, or had a better heat treat for the steel?

I don't know.

[SMI]

This argument over valid testing seems to come up so much lately. Can we just agree that some people have analytical personalities and need numbers. While some people don't and just rely on their own experience. They don't need the numbers to validate what they discover through regular use.

Neither is wrong, just different. This debate really doesn't need to take place in every other thread.

Unit, nozh, Ankerson, etc... all bring something different to the table and frankly I enjoy hearing all of their discoveries and comparing them to my own.

Now... back to the topic at hand.